I am a nuclear engineering undergraduate with a minor in philosophy. Ideally, I want to be an armchair philosopher. Realistically, I want to be a lawyer. I am heavily involved as a judge in high school Lincoln-Douglas debate. I would much rather have a philosophical discussion than an economic discussion. I HATE statistic/study battles. Bring me your logic and reasoning. I'm interested in debating you, not trying to out-research you. Rarely I will use cold hard facts. These are always used as a proof of some form of independently sound logic. I prefer to not use anything other than reasoning but sometimes I add empirical facts to further prove my claims. If you're a numbers person then you can address them but I will never attack you for not specifically responding to my empirics.

Activities:

Hockey, Inline Skating

Beliefs:

I'm a hardcore atheist. Sometimes I shudder when someone says that they believe in god. I'm a libertarian politically not metaphysically. (I don't believe free-will exists.) As for my ethics, I'm a full blown utilitarian. I hate it when people rely on rights to prove there point. Peter Singer is my deity. I think Act utilitarianism will converge with Rule and therefore I don't think it is important to distinguish myself as one or the other. I'm a philosophical vegetarian not an emotional PETA type.

Quotes:

"If the human brain was simple enough for us to understand, then we would be too stupid to understand it."

I tried this argument once before and ended up debating someone who doesn't speak. So this is my second shot. I will save the most of my arguments for when I have loured someone into debating me. Until then I will make a simple argument that initially tilts the scale in my favor. Everything should be legal until a case for criminalization has been proven. I contend that there are almost no arguments for drugs to be illegal and a multiplicity of quality arguments for the legalization of dru...

I will save the beef of my arguments for when I have loured someone into debating me. Until then I will make a simple argument that puts the decision in my favor. Everything should be legal until a case for criminalization has been proven. I contend that there are almost no arguments for drugs to be illegal and a multiplicity of quality arguments for the legalization of drugs. Any legitimate arguments are not very significant and can be outweighed on magnitude by the benefits of legalization....

For the purpose of this debate I will assume that god does not exist. (If you want to try to prove that god exists then go to relgion.) Also. Please don't come into this debate saying that we must have free will because every day we make choices and so on. Without religion or a soul it is impossible for the brain to evade standard physical laws. In this round I will be defending scientific determinism. Usually people dismiss me when I first propose this. I proceed with several questions:...

Philosophy: Debate is an integral portion of philosophy and I would love to have debates on ethics, political philosophy, free will, etc. but there is not a section. "Other": Because it would be conceded and closed-minded to think that you can create a list of all possible debate categories. After all. I couldn't even find a legitimate category to put this topic....